> > I've realised, widgets have to work extremely hard to include the js/css > > links, quite disproportional to the benefits of this. I wonder, is it > > enough to just include each link right next to the first widget that > > needs it? That could be implemented much more easily. > > AFAIK links must be included in the <head> so that will probably don't work. > > FYI, I've just rewritten the alternative method for including resources > in TW, the one that used lxml and allows widgets to be imported, > instantiated and even declared in the template and their js/css links > are included. > > The new approach doesn't require lxml at all since it uses simple > regular expression substitution, it's so simple I'm afraid I must be > missing something big that will ruin my party. :) > > So, unless there's a good reason not to use this method, which makes > setting up and using TW *way easier*, I'll probably make it the default > and deprecate the old one. > > More details here: > http://groups.google.com/group/toscawidgets-discuss/browse_thread/thread/2e0288223bbbdf45
Alberto, this is really great! Very much how things feel right to me: don't mess with widget instantiation in the controller, only return data that will be used in the template. If the template uses a widget, that's fine but the controller doesn't need to know about it. If your new method does that (it seems to me it does) then that's really good news. I wouldn't need to return widget instances in the controller, right? Cheers, Daniel --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
